The Interstate Bridge Replacement (IBR) Program, particularly its light rail component, is facing increasing scrutiny as community members call for a closer examination of its financial and operational implications.
An editorial by The Columbian urges for ‘sober reflection’ on this expansive project, which envisions a 1.83-mile extension of TriMet’s MAX Yellow Line into Vancouver, at the hefty price of $2 billion.
However, critics argue that the project’s benefits warrant far more investigation than a mere call for reflection.
The financial comparisons are particularly striking. TriMet’s Better Red light rail extension costs $20 million per mile, while Seattle’s Sound Transit Lynnwood extension reaches $353 million per mile.
Internationally, Tel Aviv’s light rail system costs $232 million per mile, the Grand Paris Express around $400 million, and Melbourne’s system approximately $340 million per mile.
These figures highlight discrepancies that provoke serious questions about the cost-effectiveness of the IBR plans.
On operational costs, TriMet estimates annual expenses for the IBR at $20.2 million, translating to $11 million per mile.
This markedly contrasts with C-Tran’s much lower figure of $1.5 million for express bus operations, showing a staggering 13-fold difference.
Critics note that this raises red flags about the IBR’s financial viability, especially considering TriMet’s overall MAX and bus system budget, which stands at $579 million for 2026.
With sixty miles of light rail projected at $11 million per mile, the expected operating costs consume 113 percent of TriMet’s total operating budget.
Many are asking for a detailed audit rather than casual observations on the program.
Concerns over safety add another layer of complexity to the discussion.
Recent incidents at transit stops, including a murder and a reported assault, have reignited discussions about the safety of the light rail system.
Additionally, a University of Washington study found traces of fentanyl and methamphetamine present on every light rail vehicle tested, leading to fears about safety for passengers.
The financial challenges of funding such an ambitious project also weigh heavily on the community.
TriMet is reported to be facing a staggering $1 billion annual deficit and has sought new taxes from Clark County to support its operations.
However, local residents express reluctance, recalling previous rejections of light rail proposals in 1995, 2012, and 2013.
Families in the area are grappling with rising property taxes, insurance, and grocery prices and are hesitant to shoulder additional burdens stemming from a Portland-based agency’s financial issues.
The request for 19 new vehicles at a cost ranging between $10 million and $15 million each raises questions about fiscal responsibility, particularly when viewed against the $4.5 million price per vehicle for the 10-mile Better Red extension.
Concerns about tolling practices have also been inadequately addressed in discussions surrounding the IBR.
The project assumes $1.25 billion in borrowing with tolls projected to range between $1.55 and $4.70 per trip, but there are fears that Washington State’s legislative authorization of $2.5 billion could double toll rates to $9.40 per trip, potentially becoming a substantial annual expense for commuters.
Vancouver Mayor Anne McEnerny-Ogle’s assertions that major projects invariably require tolls are met with skepticism, particularly when examining toll-free alternatives in other cities, such as the Brent Spence Bridge in Cincinnati.
Environmental concerns also come into play, as The Columbian cites climate change as a motivator for the IBR.
However, the IBR’s Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement indicates a 41-year delay to offset CO2 emissions directly related to construction, with the majority of improvements hinging on cleaner vehicle adoption rather than transit improvements.
Predictions for the future traffic levels on I-5 project an increase to 175,000 to 180,000 vehicles daily by 2045, exacerbating existing conditions with a predicted decline in vehicles maintaining freeway speeds from 46 percent to just 27 percent over two decades.
In contrast, C-Tran bus services are noted to travel twice as fast as the light rail and exhibit flexibility that light rail cannot provide.
With current cross-river ridership stagnant at fewer than 1,000 boardings daily, critics argue that alternative bus services could meet community needs far more effectively and at a significantly reduced cost.
John Ley, R-Vancouver, emphasizes that Vancouver deserves a transparent debate on this initiative, noting that the $7.5 billion price tag for a ‘bridge too low’ for coast guard regulations is an impractical expenditure that could ultimately lead to greater traffic congestion rather than alleviating it.
The overwhelming sentiment among local residents appears to be a desire for solutions that prioritize time savings and congestion relief, which critics of the IBR believe the current plan fails to deliver.
image source from：columbian
